Article on Representative Democracy

 

Prachi Agrawal

Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur (C.G.)

 

This article explores the meaning of democracy as a concept and provides an idea of a specific type of democracy that is Representative Democracy, which is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people. The article also deals with participatory democracy which strives to create opportunities for all members of a political group to make meaningful contributions to decision-making. Concluding, the article outlines in clear terms that one of the major problems of Indian democracy is its population and proposes certain ways to bring democracy to a better and more realistic level.

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

Meaning and Definition of Democracy

“Democracy is not just a form of government, but also a way of life”.

In the words of Bernard Crick, (1993), “Democracy is perhaps the most promiscuous word in the world of public affairs.” It is a term that can mean many different things to many different people with the risk of meaning nothing at all to some. There are many meanings that have been attached to the term “democracy”. Some of them follow

·        System of rule by the poor and disadvantaged

·        A form of government in which people rule themselves directly and continuously, without the need for professional politicians or public officers

·        A society based on equal opportunity and individual merit, rather than hierarchy and privilege

·        A system of welfare and redistribution aimed at narrowing social inequalities

·        A system of decision making based on the principle of majority rule

·        A system of rule that secures the rights and interests of the minority by placing checks on the powers of the majority

·        A means of filling public offices through a competitive struggle for the popular vote.

 

Various political thinkers, ideologists and authors have defined Democracy. Let’s read and understand some of these definitions.

"Democracy is not majority rule: democracy is diffusion of power, representation of interests, and recognition of minorities." (John Calhoun, as paraphrased by Roper 1989, 63)¹

 

Democracy is "the substitution of election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few." (G.B. Shaw, quoted in Danziger 1998, 155)²

 

"Democracy is a political system in which different groups are legally entitled to compete for power and in which institutional power holders are elected by the people and are responsible to the people." (Vanhannen 1997, 31)³

 

 

"Democracy is a state where the people are sovereign and guided by laws of its own making, and where the people do by themselves everything it is possible to do, and through delegates, everything that is not." ⁴

 

Democracy is a universally recognized ideal as well as a goal, which is based on common values shared by peoples throughout the world community irrespective of cultural, political, social and economic differences. It is thus a basic right of citizenship to be exercised under conditions of freedom, equality, transparency and responsibility, with due respect for the plurality of views, and in the interest of the polity." ⁵

 

DEFINING REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY

Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people, as opposed to either autocracy or direct democracy.

 

The representatives form more than what it used to be when it was an independent ruling body (for an election period) charged with the responsibility of acting in the people's interest, but not as their proxy representatives; that is, not necessarily always according to their wishes, but with enough authority to exercise swift and resolute initiative in the face of changing circumstances. It is often contrasted with direct democracy, where representatives are absent or are limited in power as proxy representatives.

In liberal democracies, representatives are usually elected in multi-party elections that are free and fair. The power of representatives in a liberal democracy is usually curtailed by a constitution (as in a constitutional republic or a constitutional monarchy) or other measures to balance representative power, for e.g. an independent judiciary, which should have the power to declare legislative acts unconstitutional.

 

Participatory democracy strives to create opportunities for all members of a political group to make meaningful contributions to decision-making, and seeks to broaden the range of people who have access to such opportunities. Because so much information must be gathered for the overall decision-making process to succeed, technology may provide important forces leading to the type of empowerment needed for participatory models, especially those technological tools that enable community narratives and correspond to the accretion of knowledge. People have a right and a duty to participate in government and in civil society. Public participation includes standing for elections, voting in elections, becoming informed, holding and attending community meetings, joining civil and/or political organizations, paying taxes, protesting and petitioning.

 

To quote Rousseau, “Sovereignty, for the same reason as makes it inalienable, cannot be represented; it lies in the general will, and does not admit of representation: it is either the same, or other; there is no intermediate possibility. The deputies of the people, therefore, are not and cannot be its representatives: they are merely its stewards, and can carry through no definite acts. Every law the people has not ratified in person is null and void- is, in fact, not a law. (…) it is free only during the election of members of parliament. As soon as they are elected, slavery overtakes it and it is nothing.⁶           

 

It is easy to be dismissive of the idea of participatory democracy. It seems an impossible dream built on the rejection of the realities of modern life. Large industrial countries cannot be run by active citizenries but must confine participation to elections of temporary elites. These elected elites might, in some circumstances, be motivated to compete for electoral support by promising certain policies and, under other circumstances, be disposed to implement those promises, but the resulting system cannot aspire to anything more than two thirds of Lincoln’s famous triad: government might be “of” the people and “for” the people, but it can hardly be “by” the people. So, modern democracies cannot be participatory in any meaningful sense. I think this intuition is wrong and that in important ways we live in a massively participatory democracy, albeit an imperfect one, and one that we may not yet have the conceptual apparatus to recognize (or to improve).

 

Merits of Participatory and Representative Democracies

Participatory democracy, also known as direct democracy is based on the direct, unmediated and continuous participation of citizens in the tasks of government. It thus annihilates the distinction between the government and the governed, the state and civil society. It is a system of popular self government. The merits of direct democracy include the following:

·        It heightens the control that citizens can exercise over their own destinies, as it is the only pure form of democracy.

·        It creates a better-informed and more politically sophisticated citizenry, thus having educational benefits.

·        It enables the public to express their own views and interests without having to rely on self-serving politicians.

·        It ensures that rule is legitimate in the sense that people are more likely to accept decisions they’ve made themselves.

 

Representative democracy is a limited and indirect form of democracy. We say it is limited because popular participation in government is infrequent and brief as it is only restricted to voting every few years. It is indirect as people do not exercise power themselves. Through vote, they merely select those who will rule on their behalf.

 

THE SITUATION IN INDIA

Democracy in India, according to Abraham Lincoln, is measured as a two – thirds democracy only. In India, we have a government of the people and by the people but it is not for the people.

 

The democratic system followed in India is a mix of both the participatory and representative styles of democracy. This is because; India follows a parliamentary system that has a bicameral legislature. The members of the Lok Sabha or the House of the People are directly elected by the people of the country. On the other hand, the people of the Rajya Sabha are nominated and act as representatives of the people.

 

It is safe to call India a quasi-presidential parliamentary democracy which today, as we can see is a victim of corruption and serves more as an institution of power rather than a system designed to serve the people of the nation. The system of governance is in effect a Prime Minister centred system where the role of the President is restricted to one of a nominal head and nothing more. Who the people trust and elect with the belief of a better life and increased development are today only a system that gives access to the Prime Minister to be the supreme power. This defies the true meaning of a democracy in the sense that it no more is a government for the people.

 

Prime ministers now tend to be a great deal more than first among equals. As an inevitable consequence of rise of political parties as the key to electoral systems, the focus of real power has shifted from parliament to the cabinet and from the cabinet to the Prime Minister.

 

What the Indian democracy needs is a healthy democracy that truly is by, of and for the people.

 

One of the most basic problems that India, as a nation and the largest democracy of the world faces, is that there are too many people. Population in India is the biggest hurdle to development of this country in any sense. The practice of direct democracy in India, if we borrow the system of operation from the Swiss, will backfire because every law will be opposed and every leader will be questioned. When it comes to having referendums throughout the country to advocate change, not only will the process be too time consuming but also useless as a large percent of rural India is uneducated.

 

CONCLUSION:

One of the most basic problems that India, as the largest democracy of the world faces is that there are too many people. Population in India is the biggest hurdle to development of this country in any sense. The practice of direct democracy in India, if we borrow the system of operation from the Swiss, will backfire because every law will be opposed and every leader will be questioned. When it comes to having referendums throughout the country to advocate change, not only will the process be too time consuming but also useless as a large percent of rural India is uneducated.

 

If we adopt the six principles on which the US democracy is based, there is a very good chance that we will be not only the largest, but one of the most effective democracies of the world. The six principles are:

 

(1)    People must accept the principle of majority rule.

(2)    The political rights of minorities must be protected.

(3)    Citizens must agree to a system of rule by law.

(4)    The free exchange of opinions and ideas must not be restricted.

(5)    All citizens must be equal before the law.

(6)    Government exists to serve the people, because it derives its power from the people.

 

The elected representatives should owe more than just a duty of care to the people. Any form of government, whether dictatorship, anarchy or democracy has two sides to it. A political system of governance works best only when the people who are part of the system ensure that. For India to be the best democracy in the world, her people have to be loyal to the system of governance. There is never a foolproof system that can be established at any level in any form of organization. Every concept that is proposed and practiced should evolve and get better with time. It is up to us to find ways in which we can make India a better place to live in and have a government with substance rather than a government with power alone.

In the words of Clement Atlee,

 

“Democracy means government by discussion, but it is only effective if you can stop people from talking.”⁷

 

So, it’s time to be up and doing and bring about a change in the system instead of just being non participatory observers who point fingers at the system but do nothing to make it better.

 

REFRENCES:

1.       Roper, Jon, Democracy and Its Critics: Anglo-American Democratic Thought in the Nineteenth Century. Winchester, MA, 1989

2.       Danziger, James N, Understanding the Political World: A Comparative Introduction to Political Science, (4th edition), Longman, New York, 1998

3.       Vanhannen, Tatu. 1997. Prospects of Democracy: A Study of 172 Countries. New York: Routledge.

4.       Robespierre, extract of "Sur les principes de morale politique qui doivent guider la convention nationale dans l’administration intérieure de la république".(5th February 1794)

5.       Interparlementary Union - Universal Declaration of Human Rights Declaration adopted without a vote by the Interparliamentary Council, in its 161st session (Cairo, 16th September 1997)

6.       Ball, Alan R.  & Peters, B. Guy, “Modern Politics & Government” (7th Edition), Palgrave Macmillan, (April, 2005)

7.       Oxford Dictionary of Quotations and Proverbs, (fifth impression), Oxford University Press

 

Received on 06.10.2011

Revised on   26.02.2012

Accepted on 11.03.2012

© A&V Publication all right reserved